Confucian or confusion? Analyses of international students’ self-rated intercultural sensitivity and its sociocultural predictors at Canadian universities
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction In mainstream psychological research, Confucian heritage culture is often the scapegoat for subjecting Confucian heritage culture students to cultural archetypes of reticence, obedience, and unassailability, leading to the stigmatization of international students. This study examines differences in international students’ self-rated intercultural sensitivity and the potential discrepancy that exists between large-scale differences in sociocultural dimensions and student perceptions of these dimensions. Methods A total of 120 international students enrolled at Canadian universities completed an online questionnaire which combines existing validated surveys on intercultural sensitivity and perceptions of sociocultural dimensions. Students were divided into two groups: Confucian and non-Confucian groups. The data analysis techniques include AN(C)OVAs, hierarchical linear regression, and Spearman’s rho correlation. Results The quantitative analyses lead to the main findings as follows: 1) Confucian heritage culture has little predictive value to intercultural sensitivity; 2) Confucian student group does not uniquely identify with Confucian values; 3) Second language apprehension, as the sole predictor, accounts for more variation in intercultural sensitivity than most sociocultural predictors combined. Discussion This study demonstrates that deterministic views of heritage culture may not accurately reflect international students’ personal identification with their heritage culture. Therefore, further research is needed to illuminate the role of studying abroad in deconstructing general culture and contextualizing students’ assumed fixed identities.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".